30,000 sign e-voting petition sent out by Howard Dean last night.

[madfloridian]

http://www.blogforamerica.com/

E-Voting Expert Weighs In As 27,000 Sign Petition
Twleve hours ago, Governor Dean sent a message to the grassroots calling for transparency in our voting systems. In those twelve hours -- in the middle of the night and this morning -- over 27,000 people have signed the petition!

Keep forwarding Governor Dean's message, and keep inviting your friends to sign. We will present this petition to the Congress and the secretaries of state who have purchased electronic voting machines.

The response has been overwhelming because this issue is so vitally important. As David Dill, a professor at Stanford and a leading expert of electronic voting, writes a special op-ed for the DFA homepage today:

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/

Every election is in question unless there is some way to do a recount. For example, late last year there was an election in Florida where 134 blank votes were cast when there was a single race on the ballot. Supposedly, 134 voters drove to the polls, signed in, walked up to the machine, and voted for no one. There was a mandatory recount under Florida law because the margin of victory was 12 votes. The recount was conducted by printing out a second copy of the vote totals. I've heard at least five explanations for the 134 non-votes, but there is no way to know what really happened.

How would you feel if the the Presidential race or the control of the Senate were decided similarly in November?

You can read the whole commentary over in today's op-ed on DemocracyForAmerica.com.

You can have your say when you sign the petition calling for verifiable voting:

http://petition.democracyforamerica.com/page/p/verify

UPDATE: Past 30,000 as of 11 AM ... have you signed?

[cjbuchanan]

I just signed

It would be great to see that number top 100,000 by tomorrow morning.

[Paradise]

1. yes, and thanks. :) n/t

[Salviati]

2. Just signed it now...

[napi21]

3. That's great and I thnk Howard, but

I just heard some congressman in the last few days say they pay a LOT of attention to emails & letters from their constituents, but not much if any attention to "block emails" where all people have to do is a few clicks of their mouse.

This is a very important issue, and it was good for anyone who signed the petition to have done so, but it's more important that each of us send a personal email to our Sen & Rep. It will accomplish more. (Except of course if you live in Ga. like me and one your Sens. is Zell and the other Saxby!) I still contact both, but the only one who seems to care is Nathan Deal in the House....at least he always has someone answer my mail!

[madfloridian]

4. Personal calls and mails have not worked well either.

Many have been doing that for ages. I have called, written personally to each of my congressmen many times. Luckily our two Florida senators are sponsors, but my GOP congressman is dead set against paper print-outs.

A petition like this done by a well-known politician can and probably will have an effect.

It is simple action to sign it, or not sign it. Arguing about the efficacy is silly. We have people like David Dill, Bev Harris, and Roxanne Jekot taking risks all the time.....it never hurts to have someone else on board.

[Andy_Stephenson]

5. If you sign this petition you are signing the death warrant for Democracy

the petition calls for a paper trail.

When no statutory definition for a term exists, the first fallback in all courts is to consult the definition in Blacks Law Dictionary, a compelling case can be made for the fact that ballot is defined in Blacks Law Dictionary...Paper is defined in Blacks Law Dictionary but "Trail" is completely absent. Collectively the definition for ballot and the definition for paper generate a clear and easily understood legal definition of the paper ballot needed to ensure the integrity of our vote. Paper trail produces no such record and is undefined.

Think about that...Paper trail could be a happy face printed on a reciept with the words "I Voted" on it. Since paper trail is not defined it is open to definition.

But no one listens to me anyway...so go ahead...wander down the paper trail...but when the rules change on you, don't say I didn't warn you all.

[madfloridian]

7. This statement makes it clear what is expected.....at least to me.

Dill's statement at the website: "There are several possible routes to this goal. One is to pass Federal legislation, such as HR 2239 (in the U.S. House) and S 1980 (in the Senate), the "Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act", requiring a paper trail, open source software, and random recounts."

Statement from the petition:Today we call on Congress and the states to require any electronic voting machine used in this election to produce a paper trail -- one that allows voters to verify their choices and officials to conduct recounts.

Andy, you have been a real fighter on this....I am sorry to see your disappointment on this petition. I thought those words clarified.

[Andy_Stephenson]

10. Paper trail...again means nothing!

Dill is a computer scientist not a lawyer or accountant. In the law words mean what they say. Papertrail is undefined. You vote on a paper trail...I want a ballot.

[shance]

8. Read the petition before you make that conclusion

I agree it says paper trail, HOWEVER,

it mentions the paper trail MUST BE legitimate for auditing purposes and for a recount.

That takes us straight back to the paper ballot, does it not?

What other legitimate auditing evidence could there be other than a legitimate certified paper ballot?

Nothing else in legal terms but a paper ballot can be viewed as a valid trail.

Im sure there are some who will try, however if a receipt is not auditable and certifiable evidence of a vote, then it doesnt meet the standards set forth in the petition.

The only legitimate source of voting evidence is a paper ballot.

[Andy_Stephenson]

11. it mentions the paper trail MUST BE

legitimate for auditing purposes and for a recount.


Great :eyes: but until the "papertrail" is the record of the election it means nothing! Absolutely nothing.

The ballot MUST BE the record of the election.

[shance]

12. I re-read the petition. You do have a point.

I guess we should emphasize the ballot MUST BE the record of the election. Im sure you and Bev have been emphasizing it. Im reiterating this because I didnt know the precise wording* and it might help those who are sending the petition to friends who may not be informed or aware.

If the ballot must qualify as the record of the election, then a separate paper ballot has to be the end result, no matter what else is suggested or implied in generalized language.

Perhaps for anyone and everyone who hasnt signed it and still believes its a positive movement forward, consider putting that in your comments on the petition.

I do still consider the petition to be valuable and important to awaken more Americans to the problem.

Governor Dean has a huge following and so many Americans are either in denial about this or are totally unaware that a problem even exists. This will atleast awaken individuals to the four alarm problem heading our way in November.

Once again we are back to the definition of what a paper trail means. Oy. Im know individuals like Bev and Andy, and Red Eagle have been trying to do this for months upon months.

What most of us realize(other than David Dill?*)is a paper trail should not be defined as a receipt shown behind a glass window which exhibits to the voter an paper image of their ballot choices, which then enters essentially never-never land, without the voter ever physically taking a ballot he/she filled out and placing it in a separate ballot box.

I have been involved and concerned about this issue for a while, and Bev, Andy and others have researched, dissected and done more to gain an overall understanding of this issue in its entirety than anyone else.

There are computer experts and other great activists who have been instrumental in moving things forward, but few, if any, understand the overall scope of the issue like Bev Harris.

As far as paper ballots, I havent observed any other method of voting that places the power back in the hands of the voter more than the paper ballot itself, not to mention it creates the paper trail desired and makes it more difficult for potential computer malfunctions or fraud to occur.

I am disappointed to see that David Dill still proposes solutions that maintain sizeable gaps for irregularities and/or fraud to seep through. Perhaps I read his summary incorrectly, but it appears his solutions remain to be actions that dont address the core problem. Tangibility of a paper ballot, and evidence of an actual vote that is manually handled BY the voter him/herself and placed INTO a separate ballot box from the computer.

Thanks for the clarification Andy.

Connie

[Eric J in MN]

9. nap21 - you can also call Congress.

Please keep supporting "The Voter Confidence Act."

Dial 1-800-839-5276 (Capitol Switchboard) and ask to be transferred to the office of one of your Senators or your Congressperson.

Ask to speak to someone about "The Voter Confidence Act."


Then you could say, for example, "I'd like to leave a message for the Senator to please cosponsor "The Voter Confidence Act," bill number S. 1980, to improve the accuracy of our elections."


or

"I'd like to leave a message for the Representative to please cosponsor "The Voter Confidence Act," bill number HR. 2239, to require electronic voting machines to print paper ballots."


If you want to call your Congressperson but need the Congressperson's name, you can find it using vote-smart.org. That feature is on the top-left of the vote-smart.org homepage.

[Eric J in MN]

6. Please also view this thread about litigation

Please also view this thread about litigation:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1662914

[madfloridian]

13. Update just now on numbers, 45,000. Further explanation.

www.blogforamerica.com
What Counting Every Vote Means
Less than 16 hours after Governor Dean sent a message to the grassroots calling for accountability in voting systems, over 45,000 Americans have signed the petition to demand verified voting this November.

But what does verified voting mean, and how do we get there? David Dill, an expert on e-voting who has a special op-ed on democracyforamerica.com today, writes that steps can be taken at both the federal and state level.

At the federal level, two similar pieces of legislation are pending right now -- one in the House (H.R. 2239) and one in the Senate (S. 1980).

This legislation, introduced by Rush Holt (D-NJ) in the House and Bob Graham (D-FL) in the Senate, is called the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act. According to the Congressional Research Service the act:

Revises audit capacity requirements to require the voting system to produce a voter-verified paper record suitable for a manual audit equivalent or superior to that of a paper ballot box system.

Accelerates the deadline for compliance with voting systems standards from January 1, 2006, to the regularly scheduled November 2004 general Federal election.


Requires each State and jurisdiction unable to meet such deadline to receive a paper voting system at expense ... for use in the November 2004 general election.


Directs the to: (1) conduct manual mandatory surprise recounts of the voter-verified records of each election for Federal office (and, at State or local option, of elections for State and local office) in .5 percent of the jurisdictions in each State and .5 percent of the overseas jurisdictions ... and (2) promptly publish the results of those recounts.
The House version has 141 co-sponsors, but hasn't been allowed out of Republican Bob Ney of Ohio's House Administration committee.

Ohio will be a battleground state this November, and Ney represents the 18th Congressional district. Guess whose corporate headquarters are just next door in the 16th?

That's right -- Diebold, the largest manufacturer of of electronic voting machines whose boss is a major donor to the Bush campaign and has said he is committed to delivering Ohio for George Bush.

In the Senate, the bill is being held up in the powerful Committee on Rules and Administration, led by the infamous Trent Lott (R-MS). (That chairmanship was his "demotion" for remarks suggesting that we wouldn't have had "all these problems" over the years had we elected a segregationist president in 1948.)

This legislation or something like it must be enacted in time to provide verifiable voting systems in time for November. Sign the petition calling for accountability, and tell your friends that this time, we're going to count every vote.

Posted by Joe Rospars at 02:32 PM